dismissed EB-1A Case: Unknown

identifying data deleted to 
prevent clearly unwarranted 
invasion of personal privacy 
PUBLIC COpy 
DATE: JUL 0 5 2012 
IN RE: Petitioner: 
Beneficiary: 
Office: NEBRASKA SERVICE CENTER 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Service:; 
Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) 
20 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., MS 2090 
Washington, DC 20529-2090 
U.S. Citizenship 
and Immigration 
Services 
FILE: 
PETITION: Immigrant Petition for Alien Worker as an Alien of Extraordinary Ability Pursuant to Section 
203(b)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, 8 U.S.c. § l1S3(b)(1)(A) 
ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER: 
INSTRUCTIONS: 
Enclosed please find the decision of the Administrative Appeals Office in your case. All of the documents 
related to this matter have been returned to the office that originally decided your case. Please be advised that 
any further in4uiry that you might have concerning your case must be made to that office. 
Thank you, 
Perry Rhew 
Chief, Administrative Appeals Office 
www.uscis.gov 
--Page 2 
DISCUSSION: The Director, Nebraska Service Center, denied the immigrant visa petition, The 
matter is now before the Administrative Appeals Office (AAO) on appeal. The appeal will be 
rejected as improperly filed. 
In accordance with the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 292.4(a) as well as the instructions to the Form 
1-290B, a new Form G-28 must be filed with an appeal filed with the Administrative Appeals Office. 
This regulation applies to all appeals filed on or after March 4, 2010. See 75 Fed. Reg. 5225 
(February 2, 2010). 
The director denied the petition on July 29, 2010. Counsel filed an appeal on the petitioner's behalf 
whereby counsel signed the Form 1-290B on August 23, 2010. The Form 1-290B does not bear the 
signature of the petitioner. Accompanying the Form 1-290B was a photocopy of the Form G-28 that 
was submitted with the Form 1-140. It is important to note that the petitioner's signature on this 
Form G-28 resembles other signatures belonging to the petitioner throughout the record of 
proceeding. However, this was not considered a new Form G-28 as noted in the above requirements. 
Therefore on May 10, 2012, the AAO faxed a request to counsel's office requesting a new, fully 
executed Form G-28 authorizing counsel to represent the petitioner within the appellate proceedings 
in accordance with 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(2). The AAO notified counsel that failure to submit 
the required document would result in the rejection of the appeal as improperly filed, under the 
regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(1). Implied within this notification is that the AAO 
expects any newly submitted Form G-28 to contain factual information reflecting the true intentions 
of the petitioner. 
Counsel provided an amended Form G-28 in response in which the petitioner's block contains a 
signature and is dated May 12, 2012. This signature, however, is visibly dissimilar when compared 
to the petitioner's other signatures throughout the record of proceeding. Therefore, it is the AAO's 
conclusion that the petitioner's signature contained on the Form G-28 dated May 12, 2012, was not 
executed by him. 
As the Form I-290B only contains counsel's signature, the appeal is considered to be improperly 
filed. Consequently, the regulation at 8 C.F.R. § 103.3(a)(2)(v)(A)(1) mandates that the appeal be 
rejected without refund of the filing fee. 
As the appeal was improperly filed, it must be rejected. 
ORDER: The appeal is rejected.